Justice Samuel Alito poses "ideology" question in Supreme Court LGBTQ+ case

[Jessica_Rose]

Justice Samuel Alito poses "ideology" question in Supreme Court LGBTQ+ case

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/justice-samuel-alito-poses-ideology-question-in-supreme-court-lgbtq-case/ar-AA1O2pF0?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=2bf5ac9011d04ee59f87cea9ed4beda3&ei=24 🔗 [Link: msn.com/en-​us/news/us/justice-​samuel-​alito-​poses-​ideology-​question-​in-​supreme-​court-​lgbtq-​case/ar-​AA1O2pF0/]

Andrew Stanton (7 Oct 2025)

More than 20 states have banned conversion therapy for minors, with a number of medical professionals and LGBTQ+ advocates saying the practice of trying to change a person's sexual orientation or gender identity through counseling does not work, lacks a scientific basis and can ultimately cause harm to minors.

Critics of these laws, however, argue that they violate First Amendment rights of counselors. A majority of justices on the conservative-leaning court appeared poised to side with Colorado counselor Kaley Chiles, who has challenged the law on First Amendment grounds, arguing that it prohibits her from using her speech with clients.

Alito pressed Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson, who argued in defense of the state's law, about the "standard of care" aspect of her case.

... "Have there been occasions—I mean the medical consensus is usually very reasonable and very important—but have there been times where the medical consensus has been politicized, has been taken over by ideology?"

Stevenson said she "has no facts about that in this case," but that scenario would be "possible." Alito responded whether that would be a reason to apply First Amendment scrutiny to the Colorado law.

"No, your honor, because again when we're talking about words used to deliver medical treatment, those issues are the same whether you're talking about words being used or whether you're talking about medical practices that don't involve words. Those issues are the exact same," she said.

Stevenson argued that the law does not violate the First Amendment because it only applies to medical treatment licensed by the state and that practitioners are still free to express their viewpoints on conversion therapy.

[Lori Dee]

More on this story:

Conservative justices reveal their distrust of medical expertise on LGBTQ+ issues
https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/08/politics/supreme-court-lgbtq-conversion-therapy-transgender-medical-consensus 🔗
CNN - Joan Biskupic, CNN Chief Supreme Court Analyst
Oct 8, 2025, 6:00 AM ET

For the second time this year in a major controversy over treatment for LGBTQ youths, Supreme Court justices revealed their reluctance to accept a medical consensus.

Conservatives on Tuesday challenged the view – at the core of two dozen state laws – that it is dangerous for mental health counselors to encourage gay and trans teens to change their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Several groups of mental health professionals led by the American Psychological Association told the court in a brief that efforts to alter a patient's sexual orientation or gender identity fail to meet criteria for legitimate therapeutic treatment, in addition to being harmful and stigmatizing for the young people subject to the treatment.

Major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and American Academy of Pediatrics, had endorsed the kind of gender-affirming care Tennessee banned.

"The Court rightly rejects efforts ... to accord outsized credit to claims about medical consensus and expertise," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in US v. Skrmetti.

Stevenson referred to various studies and said, "... the harm ... comes from telling someone there's something innate about yourself you can change, and then you spend all kinds of time and effort trying to do that, and you fail."

-----------------------
"(S)o-called experts have no license to countermand the wisdom, fairness, or logic of legislative choices."
~ Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas ...

... who does not have a medical degree.